These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Found: Gaming Harassment Comes From Losers: Official

First post
Author
Orlacc
#21 - 2015-07-22 22:18:10 UTC
Blowing up defenseless Indys is not "elite pvp" and you know it......perhaps the article pertains a bit to the CODE tools.

"Measure Twice, Cut Once."

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#22 - 2015-07-22 22:53:25 UTC
La Rynx wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:

The conclusion you have drawn (more general in nature) isn't supported by that link, nor by the original study, with the full abstract:


LOL

I know!
Global Warming is a myth!!

There's an overwhelming amount of evidence to support the level of concern that the scientific community shows about the affects of human activity on the rate of climate change.

However, the conclusion you have drawn is not supported by that study you've linked.

You might well be right, but you've bastardised people's work in order to support your view and tried to give your view more credibility by using a study that in no way supports what you have said.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#23 - 2015-07-23 00:28:25 UTC
BBC News's reporting of the study went something like this:
-The guys who lost in Halo harassed female players more, comparatively
-The guys came won in Halo were more courteous and gracious to female players, comparatively
-Quick and simple conclusion (from the article): Halo Alphas had the self-confidence to be gracious. Halo Betas were frustrated, and vented their immediate frustrations. Which conforms to the results of other observations of Alpha-Beta behaviors.

The article's headline "Internet Trolls are Literally Losers" was clever, but kind of sensationalist, I thought. And it's kind of absurd to assume the behaviors of a narrow subject group (probably teens/younger males playing Halo) also apply across the board to every person socially interacting online. Still, kind of interesting. Sounded kind of like behaviors of Beta males in a baboon or chimp gang, really.
Thetabetalpha
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2015-07-23 03:14:40 UTC
CODE. "elite" pvp, meh
Indeed, funny to watch from anyone not invloved POV.
Would be interesting to see a "successful" anti-gank in that case. Taser, anyone?
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#25 - 2015-07-23 05:12:13 UTC
Removed a double post.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#26 - 2015-07-23 09:28:55 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
Scipio Artelius wrote:

However, the conclusion you have drawn is not supported by that study you've linked.


Not THE conclusion, MY conclusion.
And, yes, it supports my impressions over a long period of time.

Scipio Artelius wrote:

You might well be right, but you've bastardised people's work in order to support your view and tried to give your view more credibility by using a study that in no way supports what you have said.


You repeated that, but i miss some argument other, than suggesting, i came to the wrong conclusion.

Khergit Deserters wrote:

And it's kind of absurd to assume the behaviors of a narrow subject group (probably teens/younger males playing Halo) also apply across the board to every person socially interacting online. Still, kind of interesting. Sounded kind of like behaviors of Beta males in a baboon or chimp gang, really.


Sometimes playing any kind of online games, but in the real world too:
Yes, its like behaviour in a chimp or baboon gang.

Yes, if you watch TV shows or movies, people are smart, fully conscious beings. In real life an, they are not.
And there is a pecking order.

Best example are code monkeys.
The lowest end of the pecking order in EvE. To feel better, they define hisec miners and hisec traders as lower class and put same hate into them, denying them respect., a group they can openly hate, since those do not have the most respect in EvE.
To make it even more obvious, those guys babble about "elite" pvp, when they are the lowest kind of pvplers that exist.
Only shooting at harmless ships.
Like calling a guy killing 10 billion cockroaches an elite hunter and he would be superior over a guy that strangled a grown up bear with his bare hands. Because, those are results! Roll
Other techniques are to repeat lies until it is easier for them to believe them. And then they assume, if they believe it is true, others would believe it too.

Am i whining?
Hell no!
I never was their victim, they never came across my business. But i always had fun, to prove how pathetic these guys are.

Erica Dusette wrote:

Always amuses me a little when people are left with the impression that CODE pilots are full-time mains.


It amuses me, that you think i might have the impression. I know, i am aware, always. Doesn't matter what i do, or what i play.
That does not change anything.
Bear

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

the more incompetent the more vitriolic slurry


Sure, just look at the hate J315 and his buddies spew at miners everywhere!
I just love code, seeing how all their arguments hit them self back, right into their faces.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#27 - 2015-07-23 10:57:21 UTC
Orlacc wrote:
Blowing up defenseless Indys is not "elite pvp" and you know it......perhaps the article pertains a bit to the CODE tools.

In that case, it doesn't pertain to them at all, since the study does not go into PvE behaviour.
No-one really cares what beltrats think, after all.
Erica Dusette
Division 13
#28 - 2015-07-23 11:04:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Erica Dusette
La Rynx wrote:
It amuses me, that you think i might have the impression. I know, i am aware, always. Doesn't matter what i do, or what i play.
That does not change anything.
Bear

I wasn't even talking to or about you.

Amusing.

Jack Miton > you be nice or you're sleeping on the couch again!

Part-Time Wormhole Pirate Full-Time Supermodel

worмнole dιary + cнaracтer вιoѕвσss

Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#29 - 2015-07-23 11:09:29 UTC
Orlacc wrote:
Blowing up defenseless Indys is not "elite pvp" and you know it......perhaps the article pertains a bit to the CODE tools.

Calm down miner! No need to get rude because you are bad at the game and I am a female character.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#30 - 2015-07-23 11:22:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
La Rynx wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:

You might well be right, but you've bastardised people's work in order to support your view and tried to give your view more credibility by using a study that in no way supports what you have said.


You repeated that, but i miss some argument other, than suggesting, i came to the wrong conclusion.

Ah, yeah sure.

In your OP, you claimed:

La Rynx wrote:
The lower the skills, the more aggressive to other, seemingly weaker players...


and yet, from the study:

Kasumovic and Kuznekoff, Discussion, para. 3 wrote:
While playing with male teammates, men generally follow rules associated with navigating hierarchies. Skill did not moderate focal player positivity towards a male-voiced teammate... ...In addition, when performing poorly, players increased the number of positive and neutral statements (Table 1), and were generally less negative towards a male-voiced teammate (Fig 3)


The study, when dealing with male-male interaction concludes almost the opposite of what you have said.

It says that low skilled males increase the number of positive statements towards other male team mates, irrespective of whether they are weaker or stronger (skill does not moderate the level of positivity).

However, when dealing with male-female interaction:

Kusumovic and Kuznekoff, Discussion, para. 4 wrote:
Males behaved in the opposite manner when playing with a female-voiced teammate... ...the lowest-skilled males behaving less positively towards a female voice.


The study also concluded that the attitude towards females was a result of their presence in the group and nothing to do with the skill level of the female.

Nowhere does the study make any conclusions that you have seemingly made that the female-voiced players were weaker players.

The study doesn't at all focus on low skilled players being more aggressive to seemingly weaker players. That didn't even form part of the experimental work and isn't discussed at any point in the paper.

Overall, since Eve is 96% male player based, it's almost possible to say that the study supports the exact opposite view that what you claim.

Of course, I may have missed something, so please feel free to quote from the paper any passage that supports your view.
Candi LeMew
Division 13
#31 - 2015-07-23 17:18:46 UTC
La Rynx wrote:
Without further ado (click)

The results complies to my own online experience.

The lower the skills, the more aggressive to other, seemingly weaker players...
Twisted


Confirming I am a ****.

🍌

Remember... in Anoikis Bob Is Always Watching...

"I been kicked out of better homes than this" - Rick James

Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-07-23 21:34:12 UTC
La Rynx wrote:


The lower the skills, the more aggressive to other, seemingly weaker players...
Twisted



This seems like common sense, I am surprised this is even considered news-worthy.
The toughest, dirtiest and most brutal fights are about who is bottom of the food chain, not about who is top.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#33 - 2015-07-24 07:53:32 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

Of course, I may have missed something,..


Bear
You missed a lot and are in heavy denial.
The amount of male / female ratio is not important.
I already explained, that females are often (falsly) considered weak players.
And I already explained the rest of my thoughts and i already said, that i made connections to my experience.
Thats "this is EvE" changes nothing.
It is even worse with 96% males, less women to harass.

You are really fishing, to "prove" i am wrong.
You can't.
Rememember? MY experience.
Bear
Is there a reason you feel offended?

Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Orlacc wrote:
Blowing up defenseless Indys is not "elite pvp" and you know it......perhaps the article pertains a bit to the CODE tools.

Calm down miner! No need to get rude because you are bad at the game and I am a female character.


But telling the truth is not rude!
Blink
Aso: The truth is rude for Code-tools.
Well, thats true!

Tippia wrote:
Orlacc wrote:
Blowing up defenseless Indys is not "elite pvp" and you know it......perhaps the article pertains a bit to the CODE tools.

In that case, it doesn't pertain to them at all, since the study does not go into PvE behaviour.
No-one really cares what beltrats think, after all.


You mean CODE-tools are like beltsrats?
They do not / can not think?
Well i thought especially of code when starting the thread.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#34 - 2015-07-24 13:58:20 UTC
La Rynx wrote:

But telling the truth is not rude!
Blink
Aso: The truth is rude for Code-tools.
Well, thats true!



You mean CODE-tools are like beltsrats?
They do not / can not think?
Well i thought especially of code when starting the thread.


Every time you post a reply like this CODE get a semi-hard on.

For the love of bob, please, please, please stop feeding them.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#35 - 2015-07-24 14:59:18 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Every time you post a reply like this CODE get a semi-hard on.

For the love of bob, please, please, please stop feeding them.

She is actually one of our marketing Agents who tries to artificially push our visibility by emulating a terribad carebear.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#36 - 2015-07-24 16:32:13 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:

She is actually one of our marketing Agents who tries to artificially push our visibility by emulating a terribad carebear.


I always kind of hope people like her are simply you on another account engaging in forum shenanigans.
Gunn Yage
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2015-07-24 18:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Gunn Yage
I disagree..Playing games like Wot,wows (aka War ships) or bf/older cod's (new ones are garbage content wise- same game,new skins.)
I like to win...When ppl play a game over and over and over and dont ever get better..That can make me rage...Ppl seem nowadays to be perfectly fine at sucking in a TDM game...Esp in wot.. You get guys who have 30-50k battles and they out right suck at the game..Still haven't learned the maps, still dont know how to angle and still haven't learned when to pull back and regroup..Why so many games in that one don't last longer then 4 mins.

Now some ppl in games, ya know.. Learnnnnnn how to play. and simply don't like to lose..So id say good players rage..Bad players don't simply cause they don't realize they suck, and are why the team is losing..To them losing is normal. They are the true losers bringing down their teams every match, of every game they play. They either don't care or simply don't realize they suck, and post bs posts like this.

If good players are losers?...What does that make the ppl who suck and actually lose all the time in the game? Better?

if you don't mind losing..Play FFA or single player games..Stay away from games that req Teamwork.

Rage mail is not Harassment. It's us hoping eventually you'll get it.

Before someone asks..PC=53%@10k games/ Xbox version made after 59%@2k games + 200 points shy of being unicum.

Not everyone on the losing aka losers team "deserves" a trophy, but today get them anyways. Generation is full of ehhh...

World is moving in a freighting direction..When being a loser is normal and anyone who yells at you is a loser..Thats insane. Literally!!!!!!! Severe lack of striving to be better, as you simply don't need to anymore.

So as far as shooters go.. I rage all the time. but am a above avg skilled player..So your post about less skilled doesn't make a lot of sense to me.. Sounds like you've gotten a lot of rage mail and still haven't figured out why, so your posting trying to find justification in your obvious lack of skill and brain power as well. Over the very ppl who send it to you. Trying to light a fire under your "cough", trying to get you to be better parsley and/or just out of anger based on what I've said above.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#38 - 2015-07-25 02:47:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
La Rynx wrote:
You are really fishing, to "prove" i am wrong.
You can't.
Rememember? MY experience.
Bear

I'm not interested in proving whether your opinion is wrong or not. We are all entitled to our opinions, so one persons opinion is just as valid as another's.

As a scientist (IRL) I am interested in whether evidence used to support an argument actually does so.

The evidence you provided does not (see my previous post).

However, I admit that in my reading of the study, I may have missed some section of wording, or results in a table or graph that supports your view. Quote them and I'll be the first to acknowledge I was wrong.

But until you can quote directly from the study that you claim makes your opinion official, the only conclusion I can draw based on my reading is that what you are doing is quackery.

I can understand how this might have happened. You probably saw that article; which because it was journalistic, dropped key facts in order to give way to the headline (but even it keeps the misogynist aspects intact). We see that regularly in reporting on scientific work. So without even actually reading and comprehending the study itself, you copy/pasted the link because you thought it supported your view, in which you made a more general claim, even though the study focused on gender issues.

So your opinion may be right, but that study does not support it; and to use your own words in reverse:

I miss some argument from you other, than suggesting, i came to the wrong conclusion.
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#39 - 2015-07-25 08:59:28 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:

SNIP
even though the study focused on gender issues.
SNIP
So your opinion may be right, but that study does not support it; and to use your own words in reverse:

I miss some argument from you other, than suggesting, i came to the wrong conclusion.

I already wrote severaly times, why i think this is not only a gender issue.



Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#40 - 2015-07-25 09:01:13 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
La Rynx wrote:

But telling the truth is not rude!
Blink
Aso: The truth is rude for Code-tools.
Well, thats true!



You mean CODE-tools are like beltsrats?
They do not / can not think?
Well i thought especially of code when starting the thread.


Every time you post a reply like this CODE get a semi-hard on.

For the love of bob, please, please, please stop feeding them.


Well i believe already in the spaghetti monster and i am sorry for bob.
However , i can hardly resist t to tell how measly and pathetic codies are.
Pirate

And code always love to talk themselfes into semi- and quarter hardons.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."

Previous page123Next page